Talk:Oz/@comment-89.87.3.82-20170213022558
''Ofc it'd be inconsistent. Character development differs vastly, depending on who the subject is. '' ''Try putting yourself in his shoes. '' ''What would you expect to happen once you've lost all of your memories? Your sense of "self"? Do you keep on developing like nothing happened at all? The journey to having an established "personality" is hard. And you can't just fly past that shit. It's not like a game, where you can simply load your "save files". Oz had to start all over again, and after he regained the missing puzzle pieces, he got p confused. After all, the blocks he's been building are far, far different from the ones he has left to glue onto his fucking metaphorical castle. '' ''Ah! As a very, very nice and patient person, please allow me to offer you a valuable word of advice; '' ''Try not to say negative stuff about him here. Y'know, Oz-fans frequent this page the most-- You saying that, is like, uhm, asking for a fight? ✌︎('ω'✌︎ ) '' ''PS: Alice's chara-deve wasn't overshadowed by Oz's. I believe the changes in her psyche has been quite noticable. Maybe you're just one of the rare few, who didn't see much of it? Because your mind was flying elsewhere? more question marks Last point, Oz has the right to take the spotlight. I think you forgot about his "protagonist" status. '' Thanks for the big laught and your fake concern about me, seriously, having a different opinion on a character isn't "seeking fight" you are immature and hypocrite to read comments that don't suit your own and reply it condescendly and passively-agressively, and without back-up arguments, a wiki page isn't reserved to people who blindly like a character, so keep your fake concerns to you thanks. So here come my quick reply : Nope, inconsistency and plot-overshadowing about character development don't "differs depending on who the subject is" wth is this stuff supposed to mean ? You either have a character development that makes sense in-story, or you don't, that is not all up to interpretation, the only subjective "interpretation" is about how you react to such portrayal. And to recognize it isn't a problem, you can still like a flawed character and recognize it. Oz "lack of self" shouldn't be here to begin in with the whole story facts, a waryness that is self is lacking something yes and how it sometimes can make him wears a mask towards others (and that was his portrayal in the beginning), because of the Jack connection in his soul, but not a total lack of self because he connected sincerely and positively to some peoples who took the emotional figures he needed to grow a self (his sister, Gilbert and uncle first, Alice, Elliott and Break latter) and recognized these real connection early in-story with memories and 15 years of a life that he indeed lived. So this point of "no self" is irrelevant and should never have been brought, except that the author wanted to still milk the pathos created by such easy portrayal of the protagonist and thus, Oz's characterization became iconsistent, and static (and in-universe made him look like an egoistical fool, which isn't consistent with some of his actions). And yes, Alice characterization became less and less relevant, in fact it was her in the beginning you was seeking who she was because...she was the one who didn't have any memories, any clues about who she is outside of been a "chain", and fit the "no self" characterization that Oz is credited with. Her portrayal starting with good premises, but became slowly overshadowed by Oz, and reduced slowly to a comic-relief and support for the protagonist own shoehoerned struggles. Even Echo fit more the bill than Oz with the split personality. The pity game of Oz "backstory" (his father don't recognize him and reject him ? Well pity, he don't recognize his own daughter, and don't care about his one brother, so it sucks, but he wasn't alone in such situation and should have been portrayed supporting others as much he was supported but no, instead pity game with Oz been the "most sad puppy in the world poor boy") became annoying and pointless after the Baskerville&Nightray arcs where it was settled storyline with both Elliot giving him a good deserved talk, Alice, Leo, Echo, Gilbert&co talks&supports. After that btw, it was the author purposely milking pity from readers to keep them hooked to the manga -worked with you apparently- not for building Oz character and make him relevant in any sort to the following messy story. So the author was forced to makes him relevant again by artificially connecting him back to the plot with the "Jack's corpse, Oz chain soul-plushie born from the core of Abyss", but it turned everything into a mess, truly. And these aren't the lineaments of a "protagonist" but of a black hole sue character, protagonist don't equal to "spolight thief" (in fact it's the mark of a very badly written character). Protagonist means that you follow the story through his narrative lense and interactions ad expand the story through him, but not that everything have to revolve back to him... Don't mistake wish-fullfillment character story with proper builded protagonist. Oz story started in a good way with promises to turn great, with expectations placed early in-story for his character building and relevance toward the story in a balanced way, but turned out the author failed him and in the long-run lost sight of what to do with him and instead used him as the center of everything in-universe, to avoid having too complex storylines open outside of this character. Too bad, but it's a big flaw in many shounen stories so I'm not so surprised and with maturity became less interested into these sort of characters. Anyway, since nuances seems to have been lost on you, I will point something that should be obvious : you can of course still loves and enjoys the character (I am not the one to force my opinion on others, so refrain from such impolite behaviors yourself please. There is still pieces of him that I myself can still see in good light, but not enought to fully enjoy Oz as a whole) and see no wrong in his characterization, since in the end the reception of the portrayal is subjective to own tastes, but don't expect other reader (at least me) to refrain from stating their opinions as you do in this wiki page. It is my right as much as yours. If you are ok with "Oz is great" comments, the opposite should be ok too. Thereupon, have a nice day ! If you reply, but still keep your previous agressive and condescending comment tone, I won't bother to reply back to you.